IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.21315 OF 2016 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN:
SHRI. SUBHAN KHAN S/O UMMAR KHAN AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS R/AT NO.1025, 3RD MAIN 2ND CROSS, KTG NAGAR DAVANAGERE-577 002.
(By Mr. S. SARAVANA, ADV., FOR Mr. D.R. RAVISHANKAR, ADV.,) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS HOME SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA BANGALORE-1.
2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE DAVANAGERE.
3. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (TOWN) DAVANAGERE TOWN SUB DIVISION DAVANAGERE-577001.
4. H.S. VENKATESH SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE DGP OFFICE, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BANGALORE-1.
… PETITIONER 5. SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE K.T.J. NAGAR POLICE STATION DAVANAGERE.
6. M.C. DASHARATH MURTHY DYSP. COD OFFICE BANGALORE-560001.
7. S.S. NAIK ADDITIONAL SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577201.
8. SHIVAPRASAD SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE TOWN POLICE STATION CHITRADURGA.
… RESPONDENTS (By Mr. VIJAY KUMAR A. PATIL, LEARNED AGA FOR R1-R3 & R5 R4, R6, R7 & R8 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) - - -
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the Annex-B dated 12-5-2011 issued by R2. Grant an interim order to stay the operation of Annex-B the orders dated 12-5-2011 passed by the R2 and etc.
This Writ Petition coming on for preliminary hearing in ‘B’ group this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER Sri.S.Saravana, learned counsel for Sri.D.R.Ravishankar, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sri.Vijay Kumar A.Patil, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1, 3 and 5.
2. The petition is admitted for hearing. With consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. In this petition, the petitioner inter alia has prayed for the following reliefs:
“(a) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash Annexure-B dated 12.05.2011 in No.CRM/08/NA.UHA.VHEE/DHAA/2011 issued by the 2nd respondent;
(b) Pass such other orders as may be deemed appropriate under the circumstances of the case, in the ends of justice.”
4. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that on the basis of four criminal cases registered against the petitioner, his name was included in rowdy list by an order dated 12.05.2011. It is further submitted that in all the four cases, the petitioner has been acquitted and the petitioner is a respectable citizen and is an editor of a newspaper and is not involved in any antisocial activity. It is further submitted that the petitioner be granted liberty to submit a representation with regard to his grievance to the Superintendent of Police, Davanagere, and the aforesaid authority be directed to decide the representation submitted by the petitioner by a speaking order in accordance with law. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate submits that in case such a representation is submitted by the petitioner, the same shall be dealt with in accordance with law.
5. In view of the aforesaid submissions and in the facts of the case, the petition is disposed of with the liberty to the petitioner to submit a representation with regard to his grievance to the Superintendent of Police, Davanagere. Needless to state that in case such representation is filed, the aforesaid authority shall consider the representation submitted by the petitioner by a speaking order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today.
Sd/- JUDGE RV